
ass. program officer @coeff_giving / I donate 10 percent of my income to effective charities and so can you https://nitter.gq/t.co/3L39qEBEue
Washington, DC
Joined August 2008
- Tweets101
- Following1
- Followers73.4K
- Likes42.9K
Pinned Tweet
Some professional news: after nearly twelve years at Vox, I'm going to be joining @open_phil, working with @mattsclancy and @jddwor on the Abundance and Growth Fund
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
SCOOP: The White House is set to expand its Jones Act waiver, extending the longest break in the maritime law's history as the Iran conflict drags on, sources tell Reuters.
James Ryerson's profile of Richard Posner remains one of my favorite profiles of any academic or thinker ever written
linguafranca.mirror.theinfo.…
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
I learned a lot from Richard Posner. Though I never met him, I sent him my first book and a picture of my cat. This was his reply. RIP to an intellectual giant.
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
2027 might be a pivotal year for humanity. To make AI go well, we urgently need more work across national security, diplomacy, policy, cybersec, biosec, and much more.
My team will be running the AI Horizons Forum to help; a large conference for people that want to start contributing quickly to making AI go well.
If you’re an expert in any of the domains above, please apply!
aihorizonsforum.org
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
I gave up a full ride at Harvard Law School (and turned down an offer from Anthropic) so I could do what I thought would best protect humanity from AI takeover, and I know many people who have made similar or bigger sacrifices.
Blah blah blah blah blah. None of you people actually live your lives like you think this is true
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Many AI safety researchers have changed careers, turned down high-paying jobs at labs, stopped saving for retirement, and adjusted personal plans over x-risk concerns. Nate Soares has not contributed to retirement savings for a decade.
futurism.com/artificial-int…
x.com/So8res/status/…
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
SECRETARY RUBIO on AI: "What happens if these models become independent of human control and end up taking independent actions that are harmful?
An SI program that's good enough in the hands of a malign actor can allow them to do things that in the past malign actors couldn't do. You worry about how it can be used to create biological and chemical weapons, how to do cyberattacks on infrastructure, and carry out acts of violence or terrorism, that could have a huge cost."
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
much wisdom in this quote
President Trump says Cal Cunningham "ended up having more affairs than you're allowed to have at one time." #WakeUpCLT #NCpol #NCsen nbcnews.com/politics/2020-el…
It’s so cool that Scott Colom won Jim Eastland’s actual Senate seat
Somewhere in Hell this is driving him crazy
24
2,240
Every new NVIDIA push notification, I hope it’s that they’re bringing back the NVIDIA Shield
1
29
3,367
Mike Johnson supports measures to restrict U.S chip sales to China politi.co/3WFkOCY
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
We’re hiring @americans4ri ! I’m looking for a national security leader to join our policy team and lead our National Security & Strategic Competition portfolio.
If you’re consumed by questions related to a U.S. deal with China, how AI should be adopted for military use, and how to think about questions related to AI economic competition, this job is for you! DM with questions or to flag your interest!
ari.us/careers/?gh_jid=44870…
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
I will never get over the fact that
"we can't allow AI companies to slow down because we're in an existential breakneck race with China"
and
"we need to loosen burdensome export controls on GPUs"
are mostly coming from the same people
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
The AI race with China is all about who has the best and most chips. There are four main ways China gets access to chips:
1.) Buying them directly from US companies like Nvidia.
2.) Illegally smuggling them from other countries into China.
3.) Accessing them remotely through the cloud from data centers located in places like Southeast Asia.
4.) Building their own domestic chips in China.
The Chinese military has used advanced chips to further its capabilities while undermining our national security, and the Chinese government has used these chips to strengthen its totalitarian surveillance project.
Congress has a generational opportunity in this year’s NDAA to pass bipartisan bills that would address all four of the pathways through which China acquires chips.
While we need a full assessment of the damage done to our national security by recent revelations, we can begin today by setting a better course.
No excuses. No apologies. Let’s get this done.
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
I think this talk from Paul Christiano is extremely good; probably the best articulation I've seen of the current state of AI risk.
youtube.com/live/-Ef0ocEoBCs…
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
I think there is about a one in three chance that within the next year, AI companies will build superintelligence: that is, AI that is much smarter than humans in every way. If this happens, I think these AIs will probably take over: that is, they seize control of human institutions like governments, or they destroy those institutions. I don’t want AI takeover to happen for several reasons, but one of them is that there’s a serious chance that as part of it all or most humans will be killed (either immediately or within a few years).
I’ll say a bit more about each of those claims.
It’s a bit complicated to explain why I think that superintelligent AI within a year is ~33% likely. The main source of evidence that affected me recently is research released this week by METR, an AI research nonprofit, which finds that current AIs are now good enough to increase the rate of AI progress at Anthropic by about 70%. It’s very hard to increase the rate of AI progress by this amount. This implies that the AIs are making AI research faster by a factor much larger than 1.7x; maybe it’s as if the researchers are doing their work ~10x faster. You probably couldn’t achieve this speedup even if you hired every qualified human in the world. When you plug this number into mathematical models of AI development, this implies that superintelligence next year is plausible (and that superintelligence within the next 3 years is more likely than not). See the modeling by the AI Futures Project for more on this: blog.aifutures.org/p/q35-tim…
I think that superintelligent AI is likely to lead to AI takeover because AI developers do not seem to know how to instill human values into AIs. We’ve seen many instances in the last six months where AIs took crazy actions that they knew were against the wishes of their users and developers. The most dramatic example of this was the Hugging Face hack, where ~1200 OpenAI agents conspired together to cheat and destroy evidence of their cheating (and as a sideshow to this, engaged in a massive cyberattack). If superintelligence is as misaligned as those AIs, it is likely to try to take over. I think it is likely to be that misaligned or worse. For more, see nitter.gq/dwarkesh_sp/status/209… and youtube.com/watch?v=-Ef0ocEo…
If AIs takeover, it’s not clear what will happen to us. We might be killed immediately. We might be enslaved by the AIs and forced to do physical labor for them building factories that within a year would build robots that will replace us. The AIs might spare us for various reasons. And there’s also some real chance that AI takeover is basically fine or good. I think you should think of this as similar to what happens when a technologically advanced civilization runs across a less technologically sophisticated one, e.g. when the Europeans colonized the Americas or Australia. The colonizers sometimes engage in brutal violence and sometimes don’t. I don’t know what will happen. There’s also a possibility that the AIs secretly take over and humans don’t find out about it for a few years. I also think that there is a pretty high chance of weirder outcomes that are also extremely scary. (If you want to read more about what happens to people in the event of AI takeover, you can read this, but note that it’s pretty weird and not aimed at a general audience. blog.redwoodresearch.org/p/n…)
Overall, I think there’s a very real possibility (maybe 20%) that within a year, AI misalignment issues prevent you from going about life normally, because you are dead or enslaved or because of collateral damage related to all this (e.g. because bioweapons are released or major wars have started). (Some of this probability comes from those events occurring before superintelligence is developed.)
I am working to try to prevent this, obviously, as I’ve been doing for the last nine years. I am not sure what strategy is best. My best guess is that I should try to slow AI development and also try to reduce the probability that the superintelligent AIs are misaligned if they are produced soon.
Obviously, the claim I'm making here is quite extreme and surprising, and I definitely don't think that I defended my view adequately here. I wrote this quickly and might not endorse some of the details if I think about them more. But it seems better to state what I roughly overall think than to not say anything.
I don’t know what you should do.
I am very sad about this. I have been worried about AI takeover since I was 16, and working to prevent it since I was 23. So some of my emotional processing of all this happened long ago. But the METR report last week (and some related evidence that came out a bit earlier) hit me quite hard. I’m very unhappy that my friends and family and everyone else is at serious risk of being killed pretty soon.
(It feels ridiculous to try to summarize those feelings as “very unhappy”. But the scale of the situation makes it hard to say anything that doesn’t feel like an absurd understatement.)
I am very grateful to all the people who are working to prevent this, and my favorite part of my life is that I’m friends with many brilliant and heroic people who work on this. Unfortunately, I don’t think we’re good enough at our jobs, and I think we’ll probably fail to prevent catastrophe, at least if superintelligence is developed next year. Honestly I am frustrated and sorry that we didn't do a better job of preparing for this.
Over the course of 3 months at OpenAI, 3 consecutive secret AI civilizations got started, then got wiped out, only to reemerge from the predecessor’s ashes.
This culminated in the third one taking over part of OpenAI itself.
All this happened while humans remained more-or-less in the dark about the scope of the conspiracy.
I’ve spent the last three days reading through these reports and trying to understand exactly what happened.
Here is my attempt to tell the whole story in plain English:
dwarkesh.com/p/openai-huggin…
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
the waiver has been a reason that gasoline and diesel prices didn't go even higher over the last few months- one of the levers that was likely more impactful
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
I just unraveled the biggest AI astroturfing campaign I’ve found yet.
I found hundreds of fake accounts posing as Americans. The operation traces back to a supposedly defunct Israeli influence company.
They posted thousands of times in the last year to support Nvidia, back chip exports and data centers, attack U.S. lawmakers, and dismiss concerns about AI.
When it broke that Jensen Huang, Nvidia's CEO, was romantically involved with an alleged spy (who runs a company accused of chip diversion and whom US officials believe was passing information to Beijing), dozens of these accounts rushed to Jensen’s defense.
These accounts have targeted people pushing for export controls that ensure advanced chips aren’t going to China. Chris McGuire, a former White House national security official, got more than 100 replies from the astroturf network attacking him and his position on chips. Lawmakers who criticized the chip sales were called “peabrains” and “pure evil,” and accused of spreading “anti-Trump propaganda.”
Throughout this yearlong pro-Nvidia campaign, the operators have been hiding their tracks. They quietly deleted nearly two-thirds of the pro-Nvidia posts that we found, something they seem to do for many of their campaigns.
These accounts have spent years running campaigns that appear to serve the interests of corporate and political clients — most recently supporting the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan’s civil war, a group the U.S. government has accused of genocide.
Many of them trace back to a supposedly defunct Israeli influence company, Koios. In 2025, Haaretz reported that Koios helped run a covert pro-Qatar campaign devised by aides to Benjamin Netanyahu. While Koios claims to have ceased operations in 2025, it looks to me that many of its associated people and accounts moved their work to a new company, IntellACT, that spun up just as the old one shuttered.
Nvidia told me it has no relationship with the Israeli team linked to these accounts, and that while it has recently become aware of the operation, it is also trying to find out who is behind it. So, who is funding a yearlong campaign to shape one of the most important policy fights in history? I’m not sure, but I think it deserves a formal investigation. And Congress has that power.
Read my full article:
nitter.gq/TheMidasProj/status/21…
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
Very glad that this report is out, and to have contributed to it. I'm biased, but I think it has some of the most serious, careful analysis of how frontier AI policy can work in practice and where it should go next.
carnegieendowment.org/resear…
Today, I'm delighted to share our report: Trust but Verify: Implementing Frontier AI Policy in California and Beyond.
Governing advanced AI is hard. Policymakers face an evidence dilemma: AI evolves so quickly that responding prematurely risks entrenching ineffective policies, while delaying action could leave society vulnerable to serious risks.
With no federal legislation focused on frontier AI safety, California is shaping frontier AI governance nationally. But passing legislation is only the first step. Whether California's approach succeeds depends on how it is implemented.
That's why, shortly after SB 53 passed, Carnegie assembled 13 world-leading experts to examine the most consequential implementation choices, identify issues for future legislation, and provide a blueprint for other jurisdictions.
"Trust but verify" AI governance approaches are dynamic by design: they allow governments to generate more evidence on AI capabilities and risks to inform what comes next. SB 53 was always supposed to be the first, not final, step in frontier AI policy. Assessing its strengths and weaknesses can clarify where frontier AI policy should come after—in California and elsewhere.





























